Dealing with the Past

In the aftermath of war and armed conflict, societies need to cope with the memory and consequences of past violence. These are profound and manifold: Large groups of the population are traumatized. Formerly opposed groups hold on to contradictory views on past events, which makes it hard for them to live together in peace. Persistent propaganda and conflict-supporting narratives conceal guilt and responsibility by glorifying or victimizing perpetrators. However, if traumatic experience is reproduced, if views and attitudes that have led to the escalation of violence are not reflected upon critically and re-defined in a public manner, there is a high risk that the conflict is kept alive under the surface, ready to escalate anew in the presence of trigger factors.

Learning about the other sides’ grievances and acknowledging injustices, committed by one’s own sides’ representatives are a crucial element of sincere encounters. They can even become stepping stones of reconciliation between former enemies. To achieve sustainable peace, and secure fruitful discussion and reflection about the past between former conflict parties, various methods and approaches have been developed in conflict resolution and peacebuilding. They can be subsumed under the label of “dealing with the past”. These approaches vary profoundly, depending on the conflict analysis as well as target groups, cultural and ideological factors, general circumstances and needs in the conflict region. They range from expert commissions rewriting schoolbooks in a conflict sensitive manner to group therapy for victims to help overcoming trauma.

Key aspects

Dealing with the legacy of a politically or socially violent past is indispensable in conflict transformation and peacebuilding work.

Memories of past violence can be transmitted down the lines of generations, and in worst cases serve to justify mobilization for renewed violence even years or decades later.

In post-violence settings, it is important to find individual as well as collective, private as well as public ways of working through the consequences of violence in order to reach a robust state of coexistence.

Approaches and methodologies for such working through may vary but must be grounded in the culture and context in which they are applied.